Sep 30 2006
Deport Violent Illegal and Guest Aliens
As many know I am for the comprehensive bills on immigration reform. The naive idea held by much of the conservative chattering class that a fence will suffice only affirms the idea conservatives are not perfect. I am also for less strident punishments for those aliens who have come here, set up roots and been law abiding members of their communities. We do not send people to jail or confiscate their property or boot them into the street for not providing the government all the proper permission forms, so not have a work permit to live a good life here in our midst is not a felony. The fact someone might earn citizenship in ten years (after everyone else in line has a shot, plus background checks, training in English and paying all taxes due) is doesn unnerve me.
But all that aside, those conervatives who are agitated about illegal immigration have one reasonable point – violent illegal aliens. The ones not here to make a good living. The predators and hardened criminals. Here I join chorus with the broader anconservative population. And I go one further. Whether an alien is here legally or illegally, violent criminal behavior is sufficient to get the boot and to never come back. While the immigrant who wants to be a valued part of our community is welcomed, the criminal is not. And I have long advocated a one-strike-your-out approach to this problem. Now we see the Feds taking a stand using current laws to and process them out of here. That is good news and much more important than a fence. Fences keep people in as well as out. BTW, I hail from Herndon, VA which is on the front line of trying to balance support for new arrivals with a crackdown on bad behavior. People need to keep the two issues distinct. Being an alien actually implies a higher probability of being a good, law abiding, productive neighbor. And we all know violent behavior is not limited to aliens.
http://insider.washingtontimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20061001-124826-4512r
http://insider.washingtontimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20060930-095009-6408r
http://insider.washingtontimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20060930-095009-6408r
http://insider.washingtontimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20061001-124826-4512r
Macker said:
“all the talk about “following the rules”….”back of the line”…”do it legally” ignores the reality of bureaucratic black holes and life is just so long.
I ask you, Macker, is life any longer for one who is in Kenya or Germany or Columbia than it is for someone who comes here illegally? And does it really matter if you have to go to the “back of the line” if you are going to wind up in the front row seat anyway? Those who are waiting in their native countries, playing by the rules, trying to enter legally do not have the advantange of being able to gain what our nation provides while they wait. They do not have access to a higher paying job, American medical care, free education for their children and a better living standard than they could ever possible know in their native country. They continue to endure the hardships imposed on them in their native lands which is the reason they want to leave in the first place. So yes, the “back of the line” rhetoric is just so much Beltway speak.
You say that we should integrate those already here so they can share in the cost of the benefits. Yet, study after study shows that illegal immigrants, of the education level that are pouring in from our neighbor to the south, are a net drain on our economy. Rather than contribute to the economy, as is touted by the pro-illegal proponets, the cost of medical care, incarceration and education exceeds the amount contributed by them to our economic structure. Making them legal would not change that, instead it would only increase the drain already being felt as they would then be entitled to even more social benefits and would increase the number of poverty level citizens.
I am all for immigration. It is what makes this nation strong. But I am not for granting amnesty to those who broke our laws by entering illegally. And no matter what color lipstick you put on that pig, it is still amnesty.
I hear a lot about bringing the illegals out of the shadows. Only those who would be willing to buy that bridge in California would buy that. Those who came here illegally do not care about being in the shadows. They care about the reason that brought them here in the first place be it a job or criminal activity. Do we really think that MS-13 members are worried about being in the shadows? Was Mohammed Atta concerned about coming out of the shadows? Or any of the other 19 hijackers who had overstayed their visas?
While it may make some feel good about helping those who cannot make a decent living in their native country, count me as one of those selfish Americans who wants to help our own poor before we go about saving the rest of the world’s populace. And forgive me if I believe in the rule of law and feel that one law holds as much weight at another. If we determine that breaking the law by breaking into our nation illegally is OK because that person is only trying to support their family then should we not punish those who break into a 7-11 for the money to support their families?
We are not insisting that immigrants assimilate. Example: press #1 for English. Check out your utility bill, credit card agreement, Rx instructions. All in both English and Spanish. Seems to me, that is discrimination against those who come here and speak only German, Italian or any other language other than Spanish.
I hear how our immigration policy is broken. It is. Not because it needs to be changed, but because it needs to be enforced.
One only has to refer back to the words of Barbara Jordan (D-Tx). But then, by todays standards, set by some inside the Beltway, Barbara Jordan, a black and gay American, would be considered a “racist”. Since I am of the same mindset as Barbara Jordan, I have been labeled a racist.
Stevevvs,
• Will study your links. I don’t for a minute think the Latino and Asian immigration are cultural degradation. And the environmental problems you cite can just as easily be blamed on our lousy immigration laws and system.
• We have crops rotting in the fields right now in California due to lack of workers.
• I can’t buy the notion that we should temporarily “kill” agriculture for” some future technology. ” And “low end” labor is mostly immigrant in southern california.(gardeners, hotel and restaurant workers)
Retire05,
• Agree, English should be the only language used for legal business.
• Why bemoan low end workers when that’s what we need.
• “out of the shadows” simply means that be incentivising the illegals to become legal, more will, and then enforcement becomes easier.
• Equating just “being here” with robbing a 7-11 is hyperbole. AJ is right to focus on the real criminals.
• A double wall won’t keep terrorists out. And what about the Canadian border? More Muslims live up there.
Ever been to Mexico. Have you seen how most of the Mexicans live? Poverty is no excuse for nastiness. I remember during the 1930’s when Appalachian families lived like pioneers with no electricty, running water, money, or other conveniences, the women made their own soap using hardwood ashes and animal fat, and scrubbed their floors with sand and home made soap until they were bleached out white. “Cleanliness is next to Godliness, ” was their motto. Now we have our country saturated with “poor” Mexicans and EColi in our veggies. How long is going to be before we are warned not to drink the water? Is it Aztlan already?
Macker, no, equating robbing a 7-11 to feed your family to entering our nation illegally is not hyperbole. Both are laws that are broken. Are we not going to get so politically correct that we start assigning ratings to laws; the “well, yes, he broke the law, BUT he had an excuse so we should not punish him” mentality? If someone does rob a 7-11 do we determine the sentence by the amount of money they managed to get while doing the deed? No.
And why bemoan low end workers? Because in the end, they are not so low end. Oh, you may wind up paying $1.50 for a head of lettuce instead of $2.00, but the taxes you pay for providing services to low end workers more than makes up for the $.50 you saved. And if that same head of lettuce goes to $2.00 you have a choice, buy it or not. You have no choice in paying taxes that provide low end workers social services. It’s kind of like buying a car at a real bargain only to find out the engine needs $2,000 worth of work. It is no longer a bargain.
To top it all off, it is the left that constantly screams about how big business makes too much money. Yet, they seem to back the very system that allows big business to make obscene profits.
Illegal immigration is a luxury that Americans cannot afford.
For Enforcement
The French true Right, exemplified by Jean-Marie LePen ,and his National Front Party,is bothhardline against Islamic immigrants and “anti-American” foreign policy, if by this we mean the French Right is also anti-Zionist and against America’s war for Israel in Iraq.
You simply need to expand your political education.
Ken, it comes as no surprise that you are up on French politics. Just as it isn’t a surprise that you know little about American politics.
“Expand my political education” ? At least I have a base to build on. In your case,, you’re gonna have to start from scratch.
AuRevoir , give our regards to Jacque.
Retire05,
Some thoughtful comments.
We do assign ratings to our laws all the time. The penalty is supposed to be proportional. The effort at enforcement is proportional. For the legal nitpickers, how about applying the “statute of limitations” to the illegals?
Small business depends on immigrants. The “big business” line is a red herring. Guest labor is an economic necessity, not a luxury. It’s not as easy as “just raise the price.” Some small businesses and farmers will go out of business and some consumers will do without. And more outsourcing will take place. Armchair economists won’t see this.
For Enforcement
You are lucky Strata patronizes logical contradiction from blowhards .
After stating you were not surprised I was expert on French politics, you opined I would have to start from scratch to educate myself on
any politics.